im just saying that the point of the post was to watch the video of Dr. Paul addressing the house...

other posters have had to defend Dr. Pauls credablity just cause a topic mentions his name, instead of asking your self (or actually answering them)
the questions that he proposed on to the listing/hearing members in attandance of house, i have read the thread, not many people are making
conversation of the questions,

like; What does this breach of security say about our 80 billion dollar defense budget...?
how is it that easy for a Private who like i said has only had about 1 1/2 years service in the military, get such a complete set of documents
pertaining to our diplomatic relations with foriegn countries for the past 4 decades?

Well you can't expect him to address everything wrong
with our country within the few minutes of time he is allotted. And as for the leaks, you can look at my previous post as to why the private was
allowed access to the data. Edit: If you are wondering why Obama has not fixed the way data is handled since his term started, he has tremendous
pressure from the military complex to keep information as open as possible inside the military.
If you visit Ron Paul's youtube channel he makes addresses to everyone almost every week. So he is speaking out about the issues, he's just not
awarded a ton of time to address the congress.

Ron Paul, you got to love this guy! He says it like it is, and he doesn't lock step with his party. Now if the country can get behind this guy and
elect him as our next president. Easier said then done, when our media and political system wants to alienate him and not take him serious.

yes it is but the government doesn't fear the people. i mean what is there to fear? fat kids, shallow teens, parents that just want to get by, or the
elderly that is getting crap for health care?

"we the people" of today, are not "we the people" of yesterday. the government has technologically comforted us into being lazy and fight-less.
the only way the people would do anything is, if our comfortable technologies were taken away.

I sincerely hope Ron Paul got his message through to someone in that room... Although I fear it didn't. One can only pray that America wakes up
before it is too late to do anything about it.. As for Assange, he is having to pay a huge price for what he did. He knew this would happen. Yet he
did it anyway.. Americans need to get up and start taking the blinders off their eyes. If leaking these docs didn't do it, then maybe it is already
too late for us...

A great speech from Dr.Paul that sadly will fall on deaf ears due to our Congress people being arrogant and selfish.I am willing to bet now that he is
the chairman of the fiance committee he's now on DHS's watch list if he already wasn't.

What men are you aware of who will ever face the choice of having an abortion or continuing a pregnancy? None. Ever. Never will. So, this stance of
his only effects women. And this stance denies women the right to choose what to do with their own bodies. Denying rights to a person on the basis of
gender, color, orientation, disability, etc. is known as bigotry. When that bias is directed towards women it's called misogyny. Ron Paul is a
misogynist.

edit on 10-12-2010 by thunderlady because: sp

You are thinking like a Keynesian: only considering one party in the equation. I'm not here to change you mind on abortion, but, if you are going to
say that abortion is solely based on the women and her body, I will make just one point. Pro-life supporters, like Ron Paul, look at the life of the
fetus as well. There is another life involved in decision with her body. You are thinking quite selfishly. The question is when the fetus has
rights, not whether the women can do whatever she wants because its her body.

BESIDES, Ron Paul believes that abortion decisions should be left up to the states, not the federal government. You are like so many who see two
words, Pro Life, and then automatically assume you know what he stands for. Since you are such a great google-er, you should research his ACTUAL
stance a little better.

Finally, Ron Paul does not want an income tax, you are right. But that is not the direct funding for "roads and fire departments." Funding
infrastructure, civil services, and protecting our constitutional rights is the ENTIRE point of governement, something our country has strayed far
away from. Ron Paul completely supports money for "roads and fire departments" because he is a constitutionalists.

Ron Paul supports the constitution, which supports life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which is carried out though smaller government and
less taxes. This all supports the rights of the mother, AND the fetus inside her. You calling Ron Paul a women hater and somebody who doesn't
support money for the "roads and fire department", is pretty idiotic.

I notice you people are quick to hoorah the people who agree with some of your ideas, such as Ron Paul and Jesse Ventura, and dismiss any
negatives they have and ignore anything contrary to your thoughts that they say.

I notice you people are quick to hoorah the people who agree with some of your ideas, such as Ron Paul and Jesse Ventura, and dismiss any
negatives they have and ignore anything contrary to your thoughts that they say.

It's the cherry-picking genes. We all have them. It's a survival thing.

Anyway, who says everybody has to "pick a side" and "toe the party line"? Bushwa. The coolest thing about democracy is our right to individuality
- aka "cherry-picking."

yes it is but the government doesn't fear the people. i mean what is there to fear? fat kids, shallow teens, parents that just want to get by, or the
elderly that is getting crap for health care?

"we the people" of today, are not "we the people" of yesterday. the government has technologically comforted us into being lazy and fight-less.
the only way the people would do anything is, if our comfortable technologies were taken away.

You're quite right on 'the people'. They've watched Judge Judy too often to have the nerve to stand up for themselves. Fifty years of all those
other cop shows on the idiot box just herded the flock into the fold too, so it's not just the kids. it's everybody. Who wants to stand up after
watching Starsky and Hutch, CHIPS, Hawaii 5.0 and Law & Order for decades?

Originally posted by thunderlady
He does not believe in a woman's right to have autonomy over her own body. This defines him as a misogynist.

And he doesn't believe in taxes which means no public funding for roads or fire departments, etc.

What's so confusing about this? You're the one who supports him; you should know all this.

Not believing in abortion does not make him a woman hater.

As far as taxes go, he does believe in taxes, just not the way they are now collected. He first proposed a national sales tax for many, many years
ago, which would eliminate the IRS bureaucracy and the millions upon millions of dollars wasted in running it. Plus, it would generate revenues from
individuals and commerce that currently don't pay taxes, such as: those involved in prostitution, drugs, illegal gaming, etc.

Beyond that, National Income Taxes have been imposed several times throughout our history to support war efforts, and this latest tax imposed by the
16th Amendment was never properly ratified by Congress, and to my knowledge wasalso supposed to be short term solution imposed in support of funding
our efforts in WW1.

With a national sales tax, you would pay taxes one time, when you spent the money your earned, instead of paying taxes both when you earn the money,
and when you spend it. And, it would take the burden of collection off the backs of employers.

I am all for abolishment of the IRS and establishing a national sales tax.

As to the abortion issue, I don't really stand solidly on either side of the fence: I believe that if a women gets pregnant unintentionally and
wants to terminate that pregnancy she should be entitled to do so, once or maybe twice. But, if she's had numerous pregnancies terminated and uses
abortion as a method of birth control, then at some point she should be denied further abortions.

And, I strongly believe that it's not just the womens decision! If a women can decide against abortion in an unwanted pregnancy, then force the
father to pay chid support, whether he wanted the child or not, then the father SHOULD have a say.

If the woman can burden the father with 18 years worth of child support, then WTF can't she be burdened with 9 months of pregnancy if he were to
want the child.

I'm all for womens rights, and yes a womens body is hers. But, when she's chosen to share her body with someone else and becomes pregnant as a
result, thus gaining the right to tap into his pocket book for the next 18 years, he should also earn the right to decide against her getting an
abortion, if he is willing to take custody of the child and the responsibilities that go with having a child.

@Original poster Jeanius: Thanks for bringing this to my attention, never knew someone in the american goverment would be so out spoken about the
goverment and he does bring up some very good points which have already been mentioned in the thread. One thing that does stand out to me in his
speach, is that he kept reffering the US of A as an "empire" is that the normal thought process of what the american goverment think they are?
Empires are a thing of the past and didnt gain us british many friends in the past when we had a proper one

HE doesnt believe in INCOME taxes. He thinks it should all be sales tax. Do some research before just spewing msm talking points. And hes against
abortion personaly because he delivers babies! However he believes the GOVERNMENT has NO RIGHT to tell women what to do with there bodies.

Whatever his stance on other issues, I am with him on this 5min. speech.
"Foreign Policy of Empire" Indeed . He calls 'em as he sees 'em.

Problem is ,this is one of the speeches in many, many more in that famed "5min. for every senator" Most politicians that have no speech, will go out
to lunch, take a walk..etc. The room is bloody empty when those 5min. speeches are made .washington basically doesn't care what senators say in
them... They clock in, walk out and do other stuff... A bit like some Euro-parlementarians were caught doing red-handed.

Sadly, nobody in the senate cares if a politician has an important message in the 5 min allotted to him/her. Empty senate ,and those that ARE there,
mostly nap, or yap on with the people around them. They only show their ugly mugs en-masse when there is a chance the unending trickle-up to the
$1,000,000.- + earners is at stake....

THAT's true politics,they're not even scheming on some dastardly plot, but just completely dis-interested, they do not give a toss, their cheques
will come in anyhow, be it officially from government, be it from their wealthy donors....no need to worry untill the next elections

Sorry, Ron Paul has is spot-on in this, but nobody in the senate cares.....politics as usual..no interests at stake, so no need to care, or even be
there.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.